Civil Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

joe amos yaks said:

---

And then pursue your BB inspiration, career and education at tOSu, uArk, SMu, and SDstu? What happened to Vandy?

I see it as the coach being clear about what to expect. You don't want guys who don't want to be there . . . and these kids are too smart to bite on sweet and vague talk. This isn't uK/uLouie.

Trust Coach Fox.

---

Agreed. The handwringing over the Fox speech seems overblown. Anyone that has played sports competitively has heard a version of it at some point or another.

---

The reaction of the players on the video said it all. The result was the majority of the starters, including the most productive, left the team within a week.

Why try to make excuses for it? It was a tactical error, a more significant mistake than a missed layup or a coach calling a bad timeout. Are only the amateur players to be held accountable and the guy paid $millions has ZERO accountability for his mistakes?

It was a mistake. Everything Fox has done since has been good. If people didn't keep defending it, people like me would stop trying to explain why it was a mistake and we could move on with the rooting for him to rebuild the program.

---

You have no idea if that is true. It's highly doubtful it's true, but even if it were, I'm confident any respectable coach would have no issue with players that were unwilling to be held accountable left the team.

If you see that as a defense of the speech then so be it. Just know I am unhappy enough with the Fox hire that I discontinued my season tickets after nearly 30 years.

---

You are right, I don't know that. What we know is the players did not enter the portal after their season was over or after Jones was fired, and did take the time to go meet Fox and hear that speech (would they if they had already decided to leave?). They then entered within days of meeting Fox and hearing that speech where they were shown on video having negative reactions/boredom. We know that compliance has to enter them into the portal within 48 hrs of the player's request, so we know they requested shortly after that speech and meeting Fox.

While I agree we cannot say the speech is what caused them to go, we can definitely say it was not a compelling enough vision of the future to cause them to stay. For most if not all of the players it was their first meeting with Fox. They decided to transfer shortly thereafter. Could have been a lot of reasons, including asking around about him. For some, it could be other coaching changes (Musselman to Arkansas for example). Of course, others defend Fox by saying the speech was INTENDED to drive off those who would be put off by his approach (and good riddance) which is not consistent with saying the speech had zero effect.

However, in my opinion it was not an appropriate or compelling speech and it sure looked like it was poorly received by the players as well. How much impact that made on their decision only they know.

As I said, Fox's moves since then have been good.

Sorry to hear you are giving up your season tickets. .

stu said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

from the video I saw, Lars got skills and can be a game changer for cal

---

Where did you find the video?

Now the BI front-page article lists Lars as a 7-footer. Amazing growth spurt from 6-10 to 7-0 in less than a day!

---

That's what happens when you're measured by Cal!

Big C said:

---

stu said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

from the video I saw, Lars got skills and can be a game changer for cal

---

Where did you find the video?

Now the BI front-page article lists Lars as a 7-footer. Amazing growth spurt from 6-10 to 7-0 in less than a day!

---

That's what happens when you're measured by Cal!

---

Cal staffer: "Siri, how many feet is 208 centimeters?"
Siri: "208 centimeters is approximately 7 feet"

Big C said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

joe amos yaks said:

---

And then pursue your BB inspiration, career and education at tOSu, uArk, SMu, and SDstu? What happened to Vandy?

I see it as the coach being clear about what to expect. You don't want guys who don't want to be there . . . and these kids are too smart to bite on sweet and vague talk. This isn't uK/uLouie.

Trust Coach Fox.

---

Agreed. The handwringing over the Fox speech seems overblown. Anyone that has played sports competitively has heard a version of it at some point or another.

---

The reaction of the players on the video said it all. The result was the majority of the starters, including the most productive, left the team within a week.

Why try to make excuses for it? It was a tactical error, a more significant mistake than a missed layup or a coach calling a bad timeout. Are only the amateur players to be held accountable and the guy paid $millions has ZERO accountability for his mistakes?

It was a mistake. Everything Fox has done since has been good. If people didn't keep defending it, people like me would stop trying to explain why it was a mistake and we could move on with the rooting for him to rebuild the program.

---

You have no idea if that is true. It's highly doubtful it's true, but even if it were, I'm confident any respectable coach would have no issue with players that were unwilling to be held accountable left the team.

If you see that as a defense of the speech then so be it. Just know I am unhappy enough with the Fox hire that I discontinued my season tickets after nearly 30 years.

---

You are right, I don't know that. What we know is the players did not enter the portal after their season was over or after Jones was fired, and did take the time to go meet Fox and hear that speech (would they if they had already decided to leave?). They then entered within days of meeting Fox and hearing that speech where they were shown on video having negative reactions/boredom. We know that compliance has to enter them into the portal within 48 hrs of the player's request, so we know they requested shortly after that speech and meeting Fox.

While I agree we cannot say the speech is what caused them to go, we can definitely say it was not a compelling enough vision of the future to cause them to stay. For most if not all of the players it was their first meeting with Fox. They decided to transfer shortly thereafter. Could have been a lot of reasons, including asking around about him. For some, it could be other coaching changes (Musselman to Arkansas for example). Of course, others defend Fox by saying the speech was INTENDED to drive off those who would be put off by his approach (and good riddance) which is not consistent with saying the speech had zero effect.

However, in my opinion it was not an appropriate or compelling speech and it sure looked like it was poorly received by the players as well. How much impact that made on their decision only they know.

As I said, Fox's moves since then have been good.

Sorry to hear you are giving up your season tickets. .

---

The thing about "The Speech" is this: Because it was the only communication that was disseminated by Cal's less-than-stellar media relations/marketing department, some tend to believe it was the first and only communication he had with the players. More likely, IMO, he also talked to them one-on-one, maybe before that speech, and also addressed the group more than was reported.

At least I hope he has the good sense to have done that. I sure would've.

---

It could have happened, hope it did, but doubt it did. The speech was soon after he arrived in Berkeley. He was most likely meeting with the AD and Chancellor before that speech, not meeting with the individual players.

I agree, meeting one on one would be a better way to develop rapport and tailor his message to the individual (assuming he did his homework). The speech could then be more of a rah rah speech to the group leaving the academics and pushing language out. Also, having the players in chairs with him at the podium creates an oppositional dynamic Fox vs. Bears, better to have everyone gather around him. He needs to sell them on him and staying in the program. The key in that first sales meeting is developing rapport. Next would be developing a compelling explanation of the product he is selling. How he can help them achieve their goals, how he can make their lives better. Save the tough talk for when/if it is needed, after you have developed rapport and been accepted as the leader.

Big C said:

---

The thing about "The Speech" is this: Because it was the only communication that was disseminated by Cal's less-than-stellar media relations/marketing department, some tend to believe it was the first and only communication he had with the players. More likely, IMO, he also talked to them one-on-one, maybe before that speech, and also addressed the group more than was reported.

At least I hope he has the good sense to have done that. I sure would've.

---

As I remember it was reported that Coach Fox met with each of the players individually in addition to addressing the team. Most certainly the communication continues. I can't say if he and the coaches have an "open door" arrangement with players to communicate, but that would seem appropriate since, "Our focus is going to be on you improving . . . starting today . . ."

Go Coach Fox and go Bears!

Note regarding G Darius McNeill: ". . . California sophomore guard Darius McNeill is transferring. Averaged 11 PPG & made 67 three-points this past season. -- March 22, 2019" It was in the works before Coach Fox was selected. The real question is will it be "addition by subtraction"?

calumnus said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

joe amos yaks said:

---

And then pursue your BB inspiration, career and education at tOSu, uArk, SMu, and SDstu? What happened to Vandy?

I see it as the coach being clear about what to expect. You don't want guys who don't want to be there . . . and these kids are too smart to bite on sweet and vague talk. This isn't uK/uLouie.

Trust Coach Fox.

---

Agreed. The handwringing over the Fox speech seems overblown. Anyone that has played sports competitively has heard a version of it at some point or another.

---

Yes, it was a generic speech, especially from back in the day when players had no options, and coach's rule was absolute. A more extreme example: Monty's public shove of Allen Crabbe on TV was defended by many on this board as "something every coach did 50 years ago when I was playing in high school."

It is not a good speech for the 21st century, especially at Berkeley. It was not appropriate for the situation. You only have one chance to make a first impression.

The reaction of the players on the video said it all. The result was the majority of the starters, including the most productive, left the team within a week.

Why try to make excuses for it? It was a tactical error, a more significant mistake than a missed layup or a coach calling a bad timeout. Are only the amateur players to be held accountable and the guy paid $millions has ZERO accountability for his mistakes?

It was a mistake. Everything Fox has done since has been good. If people didn't keep defending it, people like me would stop trying to explain why it was a mistake and we could move on with the rooting for him to rebuild the program.

---

Where did you see in the speech that Fox thinks he should be held to zero accountability? Fox chose not to coddle the players. That's his prerogative. The results and direction of the team in years 1-3 will tell us what we need to know. It sounds like you'd prefer he use bubble gum on the holes of the boat rather than build a non-leaking hull.

Good clarification on the date of McNeills transfer from another poster above. Also, it is your opinion that Fox needed to have a kumbaya sit down with the players where he talks to them men to men, as equals. again, that is your opinion. he may not coach that way. in fact, that type of coaching moreso happens at an nba level and, apparently, by wyking jones.

I seriously doubt that the players leaving was an either/or decision. I expect that even though most young players are not generally as mature as seniors might be, they still are quite capable of making a rational decision as to what is best for them. It is certainly possible that they might react emotionally to a speech and elect to go elsewhere based on that, but these young players have recently gone through personal recruiting processes while in high school, and with the help of parents, family, advisors, friends, coaches, teammates, etc., and were able to come to a decision of which college to attend. In college there are even more factors to consider than there were in high school. The value of education they are getting, their relationship to their teammates who will remain, their relationship with their recently fired coach, their opinion of the firing, their reactions to their meetings with the new coach, their opinion of the new coach, their expectation of whether it will be a valuable experience to play for him, their opinion of whether he can help learn new skills, and how many minutes they think they can expect from him, given their own style of play. Those who dream of making the NBA or other pro teams, will have to decide if this coach and his staff can help get them there better than trying to find a better program. They will also consider whether the coach may ask for them to change something they don't feel they want to change, and they will consider things off the court. They will have made friends at Cal, and maybe acquired a new girlfriend. It is in college where many relationships get more serious, and a girlfriend's opinion may take on great importance. The influence of his parents will still be there, and their opinion will matter. The athlete, the student, the person has to use critical thinking to consider all the aspects above, and many more to come to his own rational decision as to what is best for him. Some factors will weigh more, some less, and some will be irrelevant, but I feel the players are likely to consider more than a just a speech in making their decision. It may have been "the straw that broke the camel's back" for some, but even then, the player will likely have been thinking about making this decision well before the speech was made.

All that being said, it was a poorly crafted speech, and whoever decided to televise it made a bad decision. It did not reflect well on Coach Fox, on the basketball program, and the administration. It was likely intended to generate some enthusiasm, and get the ball rolling for the upcoming season. The speech got the ball rolling, but it was rolling downhill. Hopefully with the signing of some good players, and show some coaching chops, Fox can turn this around and make everyone forget the awful speech and start going to games again.

Perhaps Coach Fox should have amped it up a bit?

>"When I consider every thing that grows
Holds in perfection but a little moment,
That this huge stage presenteth nought but shows
Whereon the stars in secret influence comment;
When I perceive that Men as plants increase,
Cheered and checked even by the self-same sky,
Vaunt in their youthful sap, at height decrease,
And wear their brave state out of memory;
Then the conceit of this inconstant stay
Sets you most rich in youth before my sight,
Where wasteful Time debateth with decay
To change your day of youth to sullied night,
And all in war with Time for love of you,
As he takes from you, I engraft you new.. . ."< -WS
Together! Go Bears!

joe amos yaks said:

---

Big C said:

---

The thing about "The Speech" is this: Because it was the only communication that was disseminated by Cal's less-than-stellar media relations/marketing department, some tend to believe it was the first and only communication he had with the players. More likely, IMO, he also talked to them one-on-one, maybe before that speech, and also addressed the group more than was reported.

At least I hope he has the good sense to have done that. I sure would've.

---

As I remember it was reported that Coach Fox met with each of the players individually in addition to addressing the team. Most certainly the communication continues. I can't say if he and the coaches have an "open door" arrangement with players to communicate, but that would seem appropriate since, "Our focus is going to be on you improving . . . starting today . . ."

Go Coach Fox and go Bears!

Note regarding G Darius McNeill: ". . . California sophomore guard Darius McNeill is transferring. Averaged 11 PPG & made 67 three-points this past season. -- March 22, 2019" It was in the works before Coach Fox was selected. The real question is will it be "addition by subtraction"?

---

Just as sort of an aside, I have noticed that there seems to be an inverse relationship between how soon/how often a new manager/leader professes to "have an open-door policy" and how good a communicator the person actually is. Hearing that cliche will get me to immediately do the Justice Sueing Eye Roll.

" . . . open door . . ."

Well, maybe they do or maybe they don't. What is it? What do you think?

joe amos yaks said:

---

Perhaps Coach Fox should have amped it up a bit?

>"When I consider every thing that grows
Holds in perfection but a little moment,
That this huge stage presenteth nought but shows
Whereon the stars in secret influence comment;
When I perceive that Men as plants increase,
Cheered and checked even by the self-same sky,
Vaunt in their youthful sap, at height decrease,
And wear their brave state out of memory;
Then the conceit of this inconstant stay
Sets you most rich in youth before my sight,
Where wasteful Time debateth with decay
To change your day of youth to sullied night,
And all in war with Time for love of you,
As he takes from you, I engraft you new.. . ."< -WS
Together! Go Bears!

---

Joe,

I like this. And as the owner of what is probably the most powerful Stereo in the neighborhood, and formerly the owner of the most powerful ham radio transmitter (2KW) in same neighborhood, I am always in favor of "amping it up."

Who or what is "WS"? William Saroyan?

SFCB

stu said:

---

Quote:

---

Just as sort of an aside, I have noticed that there seems to be an inverse relationship between how soon/how often a new manager/leader professes to "have an open-door policy" and how good a communicator the person actually is. Hearing that cliche will get me to immediately do the Justice Sueing Eye Roll.

---

Maybe the open door is the one marked "exit".

---

Good one, Stu.

Or "Exit, Stage Left" - Snagglepuss

". . . Who is it that says most? Which can say more
than this rich praise, that you alone are you?
In whose confine immured is the store
which should example where your equal grew.
Lean penury within that pen doth dwell
that to his subject lends not some small glory;
But he that writes of you, if he can tell
that you are you, so dignifies his story,
Let him but copy what in you is writ,
not making worse what nature made so clear,
and such a counterpart shall fame his wit,
Making his style admired every where.
You to your beauteous blessings add a curse,
being fond on praise, which makes your praises worse. . . "< -WS

Go Bears!

joe amos yaks said:

---

". . . Who is it that says most? Which can say more
than this rich praise, that you alone are you?
In whose confine immured is the store
which should example where your equal grew.
Lean penury within that pen doth dwell
that to his subject lends not some small glory;
But he that writes of you, if he can tell
that you are you, so dignifies his story,
Let him but copy what in you is writ,
not making worse what nature made so clear,
and such a counterpart shall fame his wit,
Making his style admired every where.
You to your beauteous blessings add a curse,
being fond on praise, which makes your praises worse. . . "< -WS

Go Bears!

---

Of course. It is Shakespeare. I feel like an idiot.

P.S. I thank you for elevating the level of this discussion, at least.